American naivete on Middle East deal

NEW DELHI: It is dangerous to go overboard

It is surely an intolerable imposition on Prime Minister Ehud Barak of Israel and the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to drop everything and come to Washington at President Clinton's summons, to be held in virtual confinement until they came to an agreement and that within a time-table set to American convenience.

Clinton's anxiety to clinch a Middle East deal before he demits office in January next is understandable; apart from the uncharitable thought that he is aiming at a Nobel Peace Prize, no one need question his sincerity in wanting to help the peace process in the troubled Middle East. The difficulty is not with motives but with the obsession with an agreement within time limits set by American commitments to something as inconsequential as an economic summit of the prosperous nations, which could surely have been rescheduled if required.

In the event, all night sessions were forced upon the two and Clinton confessed it was the hardest part of his presidency. This went on for eight days and nights leading one to reflect that the Bible says even God rested on the seventh day! The American president left them in the tender care of Secretary of State Albright, until he returned and the marathon sessions continue.

In the process both visiting leaders continued to be unable to communicate with the outside world, not even by cell phones, which were rendered inoperable because the Americans thought that talking with their constituencies back home would hurt the chances of an agreement. The most successful democracy in the world should show better regard for democratic norms.

Unfortunately the American habit of concentrating other people's minds became a cross between the desire for an agreement under American auspices and riding roughshod over the legitimate wish of the two to consult with their people back home, if nothing else to make sure that any agreement reached under intolerable pressure would not be dead on arrival.

It was part of American playacting for Clinton to announce with appropriate fanfare that he was giving up one of the days held in reserve to hustle the two into agreement at a time when it was clear to any trained observer that it was not so simple.

The gulf that divides the two sides and their leaders is serious and must be respected, both regard it as essential to their survival and it is not lack of pressure that stops them from signing a deal with the American President beaming his pleasure in the background. If the Americans had developed the habit that Mahatma Gandhi always advocated of turning the searchlight inwards, they would reflect how much time and effort they put into selling the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty to the rest of the world, making it the litmus test of American help and goodwill only to find that back home, Congress would not agree.

The temptation to order the world in the American image has frightened the Chinese and the Russians to come together again to abort American dreams of an intercontinental device to blow any incoming rocket to smithereens before it reaches American shores -- the endeavor failed conspicuously but it has increased suspicions of American intentions in the two once comradely states who had drifted apart but have been forced to come together because of suspicions of American intentions and objectives.

Clinton has not learnt that being too eager can be counter- productive. International diplomacy is more than dancing with village belles in India, it would be a thousand pities if his enthusiasm and energy were to lead him to leave the world stage a more dangerous place than he found it. Perhaps British experience and wisdom married to American power would be good for the world but for that there would have to be a more seasoned Prime Minister in 10, Downing Street; the current one seems to excel in endorsing everything his pal Bill does -- and without thinking!

-- The Statesmen/Asia News Network